Hydrogen Economy? Not very likely 4

[moltenmetal]

opsops: doubt that highly. The problem here isn't that a monopoly is suppressing the great technological fix to maintain itself- it's that there is NO technological fix to the problem. This is a real-world problem, and all solutions are merely trade-offs of real advantages AND disadvantages.

 

[SomptingGuy]

there is NO technological fix to the problem

I disagree. We are simply using one form of stored solar energy (oil/gas) at a faster rate than it can be renewed. That gives three broad categories of options:

1) Use solar energy directly (solar cells, check out Lomborg's calcs).

2) Use a form of storage that's quicker to renew (bio-fuel).

3) Mimic how the Sun turns mass into energy.

 

[Dinosaur]

SomptingGuy,

Your recommendations are either not practical with current technology or they are currently under development. I have been told by a fellow that I trust that solar and wind are not capable of supplying the amount of power we need. Bio fuel sounds like Ethanol and other stuff currently under development. Of course, fusion is also under development. Twenty plus years ago, a physics major told me that we were extremely close to getting fusion in a practical production form. Five years ago I read something claiming that a major hurdle had been overcome in fusion power. Maybe we are just around the corner.

Regarding the conspiracy claims that the auto and oil industries are keeping other technologies from getting developed, I just can't buy that. Engineers as a class are always working to make improvements. If someone finds a real technology, he is going to work on it like a dog in a flower bed, digging and digging and digging. Folks say, "Well they just buy the guy out and shut him up." If one guy can find it, another guy can too. You just can't keep real promising technologies from getting to the marketplace. Heck, some guy made a fortune on Post-It Notes. Think what would happen if a real alternative to the Petrol Internal Combustion Engine were developed?

 

[CajunCenturion]

==> I have been told by a fellow that I trust that solar and wind are not capable of supplying the amount of power we need.

That may be true given the current state of technology, but thankfully, technology is not static. The day may come when we figure how to harness a sufficient amount of the sun's energy to fulfill our needs.

==> it's that there is NO technological fix to the problem. This is a real-world problem, and all solutions are merely trade-offs of real advantages AND disadvantages.
The depends entirely on what you consider the problem(s), and how you define that.

With respect to energy, there is supply and demand and whenever demand exceeds supply there is a problem. To solve that problem, you have to look at the underlycauses. Is the basic cause problem excessive demand, or insufficient supply? If you consider the problem to be excessive demand, then it is because our needs are too great, our desires to great, or a overall lack of efficiency? If you consider it an insufficient supply problem, then the question is based in a lack of material, or a lacking of technology to efficiently use the material?

To me, the best answer is 'all of the above'.

There is no one single answer because it's not one single problem. There are several problems and each will require a different types of solution, and technology is most definitely part of the overall equation, as are personal attitudes and behaviors, but but no means, is either all of the equation.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[sms]

I wonder if we have thought through the possible impact of wind power. We didn't understand the climate effects of IC engine vehicles, and now it seems to have caused a climate problem. I wonder if millions of wind turbines taking energy out of the atmosphere or for that matter air seperation plants taking hydrogen out of the atmosphere would have any impact on climate as well? How about plants that split hydrogen out of water, rejecting the O2 to the atmosphere? What happens if the O2 concentration gets too high?

Just some idle thoughts.....

-The future's so bright I gotta wear shades!

 

[davefitz]

The hydrogen economy myth was debunked in a great article by Prof Frank Kreith , see "Fallacies of a hydrogen economy", ASME J of energy res. tech. , Dec 2004 vol 126 pp 249-256. This article was also included in the ASME publication " Mechanical Engineering" about the same time.

My own opinion is: The increased use of coal gasification may lead to new commercial sources of hydrogen, but its current value as a feedstock for chemicals implies its initial market would be chemical refineries. If the gasification plants became so widespread that the hydrogen was actually available for uses as a transportation fuel, we would be consuming our coal reserves at a rate which would imply their complete depletion in less than a century.

A review of the Hydrogen system design standards issued by NASA provides a plethora of difficult engineering issues related to pipeline safety, storage, and feeding to other consumers, but Kreith's main these ( based on thermodynamics and energy efficiency) is damning.

 

[moltenmetal]

What I meant to say is that there's no magical, "deius ex machina" single technological fix to the problem of what to do to find alternatives to fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions. Hydrogen isn't it, nor are biofuels. Fusion might be, one day, but I'll believe it after I've seen a plant work for a few years. Until then I'm not holding my breath.

There are real, practical solutions which we can implement using known technology, NOW, to deal with both increasing the supply of renewables AND reducing the overall energy demand requirements by reducing waste and eliminating frivolous uses. But NONE of these solutions will be properly and widely implemented until we price fossil fuels, and the dumping of their combustion products, in a way which reflects their full and fair cost. Aside from yet more talk, nothing will happen while the market works against us.

Hydrogen and fuelcells, corn ethanol etc. give politicians an "out" from doing the unpopular work that actually needs to be done. While we hold out hope for a magic solution, we feel better about continuing to do what we're already comfortable doing- burning fossil fuels as fast as we can find them. The myth of the yet-to-be invented or suppressed technological fix, or the salvation of "new technology", is useful to defer action and diffuse guilt. It is not useful toward solving our actual energy problems.

 

[KENAT]

SMS, some good questions.

My own thoughts though on some of them.

I don’t see the wind turbines being worse than the trees that once covered large areas of land before being cut down. Certainly one average turbine probably has more effect than one average tree but I doubt the number of turbines will ever approach the number of trees there once were.

As for releasing extra O2 from electrolysis, maybe this source will compensate for all the trees cut down Seriously though given that the hydrogen will re-combine with equivalent amounts of O2 when combusted (or whatever the equivalent term is for fuel cells) there shouldn’t be a long term net contribution to the atmosphere should there?

 

[KENAT]

So from what I’ve seen before on the subject and the quick scan of the article the main target for hydrogen is to replace oil derivatives in powering vehicles.

One of the alternatives is electrical power from batteries.

One disadvantage of this is that the batteries typically take a while to recharge.

Why not have removable battery packs?

If you need a quick top up and don’t have time to leave the car over night you just pull into a ‘battery station’ and switch packs.

Obviously there’d need to be a standard for the packs so they are all inter changeable, there’d need to be a system for swapping the packs that didn’t require heavy lifting, and it would have an impact on vehicle design etc but it’s an idea right?

As for the re loading, I’m thinking maybe you just Pull your car over a pit which has a robot that reloads from underneath. Sure there are alignment issues but if garbage trucks can do it with garbage cans it can be over come.

So, who’s gonna be the first to point out the obvious flaws in my plan.

 

[GregLocock]

There aren't any obvious flaws with a plug-in battery pack. I'd make the battery packs smart, with on-board logging of current demand. You'd pay for the net electricity used, plus some allowance for wear and tear based on total current flow (not necessarily linear), plus a leasing cost, plus any penalties for abuse. If your next battery is duff, you tag it when you turn it in. Note that if you recharge it at home from a wind generator this WILL reduce your cost of running the car, but the battery owner still makes money.

Note that your car will be cheaper to run if you do not abuse the battery, so the manufacturer will fit some sort of max current limit, and might include some supercaps to provide higher power levels intermittently.

However, now your service station has got a stack of dead batteries. These either need to be recharged on site - big copper, or transported via truck to a central recharging facility. Let's just hope that the latter alternative does not use as much fuel as the electric car has saved. Quick sum, 40 tonnes of 60 Wh/kg batteries is 2.4 e6 Wh, that's the equivalent of 200 kg of fuel. Ow. That's the problem.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[owg]

You would need to charge the batteries at the charging station. I don't see the problem with the local power supply, its just like starting a factory. Also batteries would be charged overnight in situ at home so the charging station visit would just be for long trips. The next generation of hybrids will be chargeable I think. So all we have to do is solve the power generation problem. However that is the major problem.

HAZOP at

http://www.curryhydrocarbons.ca

 

[sms]

KENAT,

My point is really that we need to evaluate solutions from a broader perspective. Can hydrogen be used to run cars, sure. Does it solve the broader problem of climate change, in my opinion no it doesn't. It simply shifts the source of pollution, or changes its form.

Is wind the savior of the world, not likely. How about nuclear, looks good but has some obvious problems as well. But what are the non-obvious problems??

I really doubt that if in the 1950's to 1960's the science and engineering community had foreseen the effects of pollution on climate that things would have turned out the same, I expect our cars would have been cleaner sooner.

I also really doubt that the science and engineering community fully understands the effects of pollution on climate change. I don't advocate analysis paralysis, but we ought to be asking long-term impact questions of any technology that is intended for broad use, rather than assume it is benign. The assumption is that wind power is completely benign, is it really?


-The future's so bright I gotta wear shades!

 

[SomptingGuy]

Re electric vehicles...

So when most vehicles are electric and can be charged from a mains outlet, how do governments charge huge taxes for vehicle use? I've mentioned this before in eng-tips: it's easy to make "red diesel" for non-automotive use but how do you make "red electricity" for home use? How can VOSA test my electricity if stopped?

 

[owg]

We already have green electricity in Canada. It costs a bit more but you feel good using it. With modern metering methods it should not be a problem. Of course there will be those who wire around the meter just as there are today.

HAZOP at

http://www.curryhydrocarbons.ca

 

[GregLocock]

SG, why should the gummint need to tax the electricity? I thought we were taxing gasoline as a way of reducing demand (officially). If you want to tax road users then there are plenty of alternatives.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[SomptingGuy]

Greg,

Odd question. The "gummint" doesn't give a rat's ass where the cash comes from. If their vote-chasing policy causes a net reduction in tax income, taxation will move elsewhere.

 

[GregLocock]

Exactly, so why were you wondering about taxing the elctricity?


Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[oldfieldguy]

GregLocock--

Becaue the government is less concerned about the environment than it is about taxes. In an earlier post somewhere I alluded to the fact that the state of Oregon was contemplating a tax on miles driven, this being due to the lower revenenue from gasoline taxes as brought about by people buying more fuel-efficient cars. It was government intent that people buy the fuel efficient cars, but the unintended consequences of that action was lower revenue from fuel taxes. So now, we find that hte governement REALLY wants the taxes, so they'll try to tax mileage.

If they can figure out how to tax electricity used for automobiles, I'm sure that some smart politician will try to do it.

old field guy

 

[KENAT]

Greg & others,

I was thinking onsite re-charging (maybe a wind turbine out back and solar panels on the roof ). With carefull stock management you might even be able to do most of the charging at low demand times.

I was also thinking cars would already come with the battery pack and you'd just be swapping them, kind of like a BBQ propane tank, so assumed the cost the station originally purchasing the batteries, running the station etc would be amortized across the electrical energy.

I guess the battery packs themselves could be taxed, justified due to the energy and some of the chemicals most likely needed to make them.

Maybe I'll start a thread with one of my other crazy ideas.

sms, I wasn't knocking the idea of asking questions and looking at other options before we get to far, I was just putting my thoughts on a couple of the questions you posted. For turbines one factor is any possible affect on wild life, especially the flying kind.

 

[Dinosaur]

If y'all think the solution is so obvious that we just need some good batteries, a few solar panels at work and a wind turbine out back, then get some venture capitol together and make some millions.